No

Representation ID: 96191

Received: 04/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs BALLY MALTBY

Please see previous comments regarding proposed Wedgenock Park Farm and also the need to develop land located outside of the green belt as a first principle before land within the green belt is considered

Yes

Representation ID: 96317

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Southam Town Council

Southam Town, District and County elected representatives support this Policy Direction.

Yes

Representation ID: 96567

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Shipston Town Council

Agree

Yes

Representation ID: 96676

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: John Dinnie

Yes

Yes

Representation ID: 96858

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Alcester Town Council

Alcester Town Council, Arrow with Weethley Parish Council, Kinwarton Parish Council, Wixford Parish Council and Great Alne Parish Council (together referred to as Alcester Parishes Group or ‘APG’) supports the approach for allocating strategic sites. APG strongly supports further unallocated employment development within or adjacent to Main Rural Centres (as defined in the SDC Core Strategy) such as Alcester.

Other

Representation ID: 96927

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Margaret Jeffery

The site south of Leamington at Red House Farm is good as it is outside the Green Belt, near the M40 and falls outside the Green Belt

Yes

Representation ID: 97136

Received: 26/02/2025

Respondent: Tysoe Parish Council

Yes.

No

Representation ID: 97346

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Vince Holley

Totally unrealistic. Has anyone from Government actually visited the proposed site? The main A3400 road which is the only access and exit to the development is already struggling to cope with residents and visitors (it is an international tourist town) The approaches to Statford are often gridlocked. Railway stations do not have car parking facilities and are situated on narrow lanes. In addition local wildlife will disappear from the villlages.

Yes

Representation ID: 97603

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Martin Winter

It makes sense that brownfield land at the old RAF Gaydon is used and I agree that large scale logistics are not suitable at this site. Any development at this location needs to respect the gaps to the existing village at Gaydon and the visual impact on the area. Existing buildings at the site are barely visible from the road and this helps maintain the local rural character despite there being major employment at the sites. This fits with the principle of maintaining a beautiful and well designed south Warwickshire.

Other

Representation ID: 97799

Received: 05/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Gary Jeffery

I support the first potential strategic site to the south of Leamington. It falls outside the green belt and relates well to the existing urban areas and the M40.

No

Representation ID: 98469

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Paul Bird

The policy should establish a hierarchy of preferences and priorities:
1. JLR allocation at Gaydon, an existing allocation
2. Land at Red House Farm, a site with potential advantages as listed in the draft policy, and significantly not classified as Green Belt
3. Wedgnock Park Farm, but only as a last resort failing insufficient possibilities at the other sites, since this is actively cultivated agricultural land within the Green Belt. Within this the site known as WWK3 adjacent to the A46 should be favoured over HAT2 as designated in the SWLP Green Belt Review.

No

Representation ID: 98504

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Holly Farm Business Park

Agent: The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

*Lacks specificity re non-strategic employment land requirements.
*Overly focussed on strategic allocations and large companies. Proposals to expand HFPB ‘sifted out’.
*Approach at Gaydon unclear.
*The former airfield at RAF Honiley, not properly considered.
*Reality check, whereby non-strategic sites and employers as well as SMEs that set up and seek to expand in the local economy should be given full recognition and prioritisation.
*Reconsider proposals at HFBP.

Other

Representation ID: 98524

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: SupremeTech

Agent: Delta Planning

SupremeTech supports the approach that ‘unallocated employment development’ will be directed to the main South Warwickshire settlements in the first instance.

If it is not proposed that Land off Princes Drive, Kenilworth is to be allocated, this site nevertheless is representative of this approach given its location in Kenilworth, which is a Priority Area 1 category settlement and is well-contained within the existing Princes Drive industrial estate.

Please refer to our full response for further details.

No

Representation ID: 98788

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Helena Foreman

Please see previous comments regarding proposed Wedgenock Park Farm and also the need to develop land located outside of the green belt as a first principle before land within the green belt is considered

Yes

Representation ID: 98798

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Deeley Properties

Agent: Delta Planning

Deeley Properties supports the identification of Land at Banbury Road, Gaydon as part of existing 100ha. JLR allocation at Gaydon, as a strategic employment site and supports the approach which confirms that the existing Gaydon employment allocation will be taken forward for allocation. However it is unclear why strategic logistics units could be prevented on this site.

It is respectfully requested that the SWLP does not restrict the proposed uses of Land at Banbury Road, Gaydon, and the wider draft allocation, and allow for the full size range of B2/B8 uses.

Please refer to our full response for further details.

No

Representation ID: 99039

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: MPTL

Agent: Harris Lamb

Additional employment land is required to take account of the fact that the plan period runs to 2050 (we proposed is should be 2055), whereas the WMSESS only assesses needs up to 2045.

Stoneleigh Park Employment Group should be a Strategic Employment site.

Yes

Representation ID: 99066

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Nurton Developments

Agent: Chave Planning

In summary, NDL agrees with the approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction 12 and welcomes further discussion regarding the contribution that Wedgnock Park Farm could make towards meeting need identified by the WMSESS and associated Alignment Paper.

No

Representation ID: 99311

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Garry Rollason

I do not agree with the inclusion of SG07 Wedgnock Park Farm as a site for employment growth because it is in the green belt. Development at that site would join up the Warwick / Leamington urban area with the existing housing estate at Hatton Park. This would go against the purposes of the Green Belt (i.e. to check the unrestricted sprawl of urban areas, to prevent neighbouring towns from merging, to preserve the setting of historic towns). The Stanks Island on the A46, and the A46 itself, is already at capacity and would require remodelling or a new junction.

Other

Representation ID: 99343

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Summers Holdings Ltd

Agent: The Tyler Parkes Partnership Ltd

Broadly agree, however, focusing on large employment sites at the expense of smaller sites is a concern. The Iceni ‘South Warwickshire New Settlements Employment Note’ confirmed New Settlement A1 could support significant employment development given its strategic location and should be allocated, including site 758 for residential. A1 and site 758's location should be recognised to meet local business and community needs. The development would meet Section 6.6 (Supporting Rural Employment) and para 89 of the NPPF - it would use brownfield land and is physically well-related to existing settlements.

No

Representation ID: 99376

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Caddick and Erdgard

Agent: Mr Robert Barnes

A clear strategic employment land requirement exists that might best be met in part through development within South Warwickshire, specifically at M42 Junction 3. This is ignored by the emerging Plan. There is no prospect of this strategic employment requirement being addressed in the foreseeable future through planned development. The potential locations offered by the emerging Plan for strategic employment are inferior and not immediately available or readily deliverable. Land at Junction 3 should be allocated to help meet a specific requirement in a highly rated location, offering immediate availability for development and other important benefits.

No

Representation ID: 99446

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Hatton Parish Council

Wedgenock Park Farm should remain just that.
Together with Site B1, Land at Hatton, if selected, these sites would extend the Warwick built-up area some 4 miles north-west, with the obliteration of valuable Green Belt land which identifies the historic town of Warwick.
This would be used mainly for warehousing and distribution, providing little employment and much pollution from HGV movements.
Employment opportunities should be concentrated in urban areas hollowed out by closure of shops due on-lone retail activity and reduced need for office space due WFH and AI

No

Representation ID: 99486

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Carolyn Haynes

There is no plan for employment/industry opportunities around the Alcester area yet there is a proposal for well over 3,000 homes. Where will all these people work? How will they get there? It's largely single lane roads in and around Alcester.

No

Representation ID: 99492

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Diane Wilson

Reuse existing or brown sights only.

No

Representation ID: 99689

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Rebecca Loades

It has been reported recently the lack of employment options in Stratford Upon Avon. PLEASE consider that this town needs re-evaluating before even considering Wellesbourne and the surrounding areas. Shopping are boarded up, there are far too many cafes, and there is no incentive for youngsters to spend time in the town. This should be a priority, not the outskirts.

Yes

Representation ID: 99720

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Welford on Avon Parish Council

Clearly this is good.

Proposed new town E1 doesnt have any employment proposal, so should be removed due to the obvious unsustainability of it.

Yes

Representation ID: 100310

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Lorraine Grocott

NA

No

Representation ID: 100341

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Geoff Cooper

The provision of two one-way junctions at J13 and J14 of the M40 is down to extremely bad planning. Surely planners should have some foresight or simple common sense, but no. J13 has experienced a large number of accidents and a multitude of near misses almost daily. This has to be improved with a roundabout and lights.

No

Representation ID: 100547

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Vanessa Chivers

I consider the change from top-grade agricultural land at Red House Farm to an industrial development to be short sighted given the wider challenges faced by the UK at present. In an era of increasing concerns over nations self-reliance, defence and food security, destroying prime agricultural land seems wreckless. The changes laid out to the junctions of the M40 will not be enough to sustain both proposed industrial and housing developments and funds would be better suited to a more suitable location. The Net Reduction of biodiversity in this area would also be a cause for concern.

No

Representation ID: 100636

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mrs Susan Ray

none

No

Representation ID: 100989

Received: 07/03/2025

Respondent: Mr Stuart Foreman

Land should be developed that is located outside of the green belt as a first principle before land within the green belt is considered. This should only be considered as last resort, once it has been thoroughly assessed and determined that there are no other suitable sites located outside the green belt. Only after all viable non-green belt options have been exhausted should limited release of green belt land be contemplated. It is crucial the Council carefully considers areas where development would have least detrimental impact on the fundamental objectives of green belt policy, as per National Planning Policy Framework(NPPF)